Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
3, April, 2013
34
INTRODUCTION
Application of models in hydrological studies has become an
indispensible tool for understanding of the natural processes
occurring at the watershed scale. Plenty of computer-based
hydrologic/water quality models have been developed and
available for applications in hydrologic modeling and water
resources studies. They are increasingly being utilized to
analyze the quantity and quality of stream flow, flood
forecasting, reservoir system operations, groundwater
development and protection, surface water and groundwater
conjunctive use management, water distribution system, water
use, climate and land use change impact study, ecology and a
range of water management activities (Wurbs 1998; Singh and
Woolhiser, 2002). In the recent years, with the dramatic
development of computational capabilities and algorithm
backed with newly available distributed databases like radar
rainfall, high resolution digital elevation models (DEMs),
remotely sensed satellite data and space technology, mighty
arsenal of available hydrological models has been reported in
the published literature. These models are varied from simple
empirical relationship for evaluation of flood events to simple
ones containing a certain degree of physicality, to stochastic
models of various kinds and finally to more recent numerically
complex physically based distributed models (Borah and Bera,
2003; Gosain et al., 2009). There is wide variability in their
characteristics and potential applications, for example, spatial
and temporal scale, processes modeled and the basis of
relationships and algorithm used. With this increasing number
of availability, wide ranging characteristics and potential
applications of the models, it is becoming challenging job for
the potential model users to choose a particular model best
suited for the given problem. In addition, modifications are
made to existing models and new models are available each
year. Therefore, updated, consistent and comprehensive
evaluations of hydrological models are a continuous need.
A model can be evaluated by comparing the model results or
capabilities to other models or some other expected/specific
response. In the past, many different attempts have been
initiated to evaluate the hydrological models amongst
themselves and with lumped models. Inter-comparison of
conceptual models (WMO, 1975), inter-comparison of snow
accumulation and melting models (WMO, 1986) and inter-
comparison of real-time updating approaches applied to
hydrological flood forecasting models (WMO, 1992) are some
examples. The distributed model inter-comparison project
(DMIP) (Reed et al., 2004) and DMIP Phase II (DMIP 2)
(http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hrl/dmip/2/) by the US-National
Weather Service in order to assess the performance of
distributed hydrologic models are another important works in
the field of hydrologic model comparison and evaluation.
Besides institutional practices, for example, Borah and Bera
(2003) evaluated eleven commonly used watershed scale
hydrologic and non-point source pollution models based on
their mathematical bases and Migliaccio and Srivastava (2007)
compared hydrologic components of five watershed scale
hydrologic models. More recently, Gudmundsson et al. (2012)
evaluated nine large scale hydrological models based on their
ability to capture the runoff climatology i.e. mean annual water
balance and seasonality of runoff.
In the present study nine recently developed or regularly
updated hydrologic models namely: AnnAGNPS, GSSHA,
HYPE, Hec-HMS, MIKE-SHE, PRMS, SWAT, WetSpa, and
WinSRM have been selected for the inter-comparison
evaluation. Criteria used for the evaluation are: (I)
Hydrological processes that the model can simulate, (II)
Governing equations used to simulate the hydrologic
processes, (III) Minimum data required to run the model and
(IV) spatial and temporal scale of the model. These criteria are
four common, fundamental ones that must be always answered
before selecting any hydrologic models. The main objective of
this study is to consolidate latest information of the commonly
used and recently developed hydrologic models which may be
helpful for potential model users to choose the best model for
their applications.
MODEL DESCRIPTIONS
AnnAGNPS
Annualized Agricultural Non-point Source Model
(AnnAGNPS) (Bingner et al., 2011) is a watershed-scale,
continuous simulation model designed to predict the impact of
management on water, sediment, nutrients, and pesticides in
agricultural watersheds. AnnAGNPS is the next generation of
Journal of Indian Water Resources Society,
Vol 33, No. 3, April, 2013
COMPARATIVE REVIEW OF RECENTLY DEVELOPED
HYDROLOGIC MODELS
Bir Singh Dhami
and Ashish Pandey
ABSTRACT
Present study is focused on a comparative evaluation of some recently developed, regularly updated and well documented hydrologic models
namely: AnnAGNPS, GSSHA, HYPE, Hec-HMS, MIKE-SHE, PRMS, SWAT, WetSpa, and WinSRM. All these models are public domain
(freely available) except MIKE-SHE. AnnAGNPS, HYPE, SWAT and WinSRM are continuous simulation models while GSSHA, Hec-HMS,
MIKE-SHE, PRMS and WetSpa have both long-term and single event simulation capabilities. In this study, models are evaluated based on:
(I) Hydrological processes that the model can simulate, (II) Governing equations used to simulate the hydrologic processes, (III) Minimum
data required to run the model and (IV) spatial and temporal scale of the model. This study can be helpful in the selection of suitable model
as per the problem at hand and save lots of time required just to know whether the model is suitable or not.
Key words: Hydrologic modelling, Hydrologic processes, simulation, Evaluation, Scale of the model
Department of Water Resources Development and
Management, IIT, Roorkee, Roorkee-247667, India
Manuscript No.: 1352
J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol. 33, No. 3, April, 2013
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42